[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

# re: MOO and VRML

- Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 08:17:47 PST
- From:
- Cc: www-vrml@wired.com, moving-worlds@sgi.engr.sgi.com
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

    At 03:53 PM 2/16/96 PST, paunovic@ucinti.enet.dec.com wrote:

    >- If anyone might be interested in collaborating with me to write a MOO/VRML
    >environment from scratch, please e-mail paunovic@uiuc.edu
    >It would of course be freeware, so you would get no profit.. just the
    >experience :)
    >
    >/Nick, ArchWiz STAR WARS MOO (opening August 1996! )
    >http://www.cen.uiuc.edu/~paunovic/
    >e-mail: paunovic@uiuc.edu
    >
    >[standard disclaimer: the opinions i express are not necessarily those of]
    >[digital semiconductor. ]
    >
    >

    As for me, I work now on applying VRML 2.0 to MOO/WOO technology.
    I am interested to collaborate with anybody creating VRML-based
    netwoked worlds architecture exploiting MOO achivements.

    I keep a close look on VRML behaviors discussions, especially on
    "Moving Worlds" proposals.

    IMHO VRML is just a tool to build 3D worlds with support
    for some event propagation in it and simple behaviors triggered by these events,
    intended mostly to modify graphical representation of objects
    in this 3D world.
    VRML is NOT an architecture for VR worlds (correct me if I am wrong).

    So what are possible solutions for VR Worlds architecture ? By VR Worlds
    architecture I understand basic framework that will provide for
    different hypermedia networked worlds.

    Designing this framework, one certainly should consider WEB advantage
    that gives the best distribution/partitioning of worlds space
    on the net of today.

    WOODS/MOOniverse project is an example of integrating WEB and MOO together
    resulting in some success on distributing the load in multiuser VR world.
    WOODS distributed server (SprawlCore server/database) is a possible
    solution.

    SprawlCore servers communicate over network with each other providing
    for users "virtual MOO" 2D space in HTML, accessible by WEB clients.

    I don't know any other working architecture of distributed VR of today,
    except for DIS, which is "war-games" oriented only. Do you ?

    Anyway MOO architecture has some concepts proved to be efficient in
    multiuser worlds, that should be considered in VRML worlds architecture, I
    think. By these concepts I mean :

    - behavior based on object container relationship;
    - system of user access/modification rights on objects and their properties;
    - scalabilty of MOO space on a single server and across servers;

    As well as OOP features of MOO programming language :

    - dynamic inheritance;
    - prototype delegation;

    These MOO concepts and OOP features seem to be essential for worlds
    architecture.

Follow-Ups:

- re: MOO and VRML

- From: "Peter Graf (415) 285-1359" <peter@blacksun.com>

- re: MOO and VRML

- From: "Robert J. Brown" <rj@eli.wariat.org>

- Prev: RE: MOO and VRML
- Next: re: MOO and VRML
- Index: MOO-cows
- Thread: MOO-cows

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index